Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="epithet" data-source="post: 6675313" data-attributes="member: 6796566">So, with your edit, a clearer picture emerges.Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I now have the impression that to you, a Warlord is a character that can be, if the player so chooses, built and spec'd to be as effective at instantaneous healing as a Cleric can be, but without the use of any magic. The Warlord is and must be a "Martial Healer" on par with the extant magical healers in the game. To limit the ability of the class to heal that much, or to characterise that healing as magic, necessarily means that the class is no longer a Warlord by your definition of the class.Is that impression inaccurate?The only other possibility I can see is that you're the one stuck in some sort of "edition war," and you are adamant that the only acceptable way to implement a 5e Warlord is to copy the 4e class as closely as possible.I'm not drawing lines in the sand. I've considered your posts and embraced some of your reasoning - I believe it was you that suggested that the "heal" I was suggesting using hit dice was too cumbersome, and should be simplified, leading me to look at Second Wind as a more elegant means to that end. You do seem to be drawing lines in the sand, however: you clearly believe that the Warlord should be able to fill the healer role without using temporary hit points, and that any suggestion that differs from that absolute is "the position that the Warlord shouldn't exist at all."</blockquote>

Verification